An appeals court ruling handed down Monday is being largely viewed as yet another victory for biotech giant Monsanto.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled this week
that an earlier ruling favoring Monsanto would stay intact,
despite mounting concerns voiced by farmers and agriculturists
bothered by the biotech company’s reputation for litigation.

The plaintiffs in the case — dozens of independent and small time
crop growers — filed a lawsuit in March 2011 in hopes of having a
federal court protect them against any future claims courtesy of
Monsanto. The St. Louis-based biotech company has pursued more
than 800 patent infringement cases at a cost of around $10
million a year, often bankrupting farmers because their fields
are found to contain traces of genetically-modified or
–engineered seeds and crops patented by Monsanto. Those plants,
“Roundup Ready” crops, are made to withstand exposure to the
Roundup weed killer made and marketed by Monsanto. The Southern
District of New York previously ruled that it could not force
Monsanto to guarantee it won’t file future claims against farmers
found to have trace amounts of GMO seeds in their fields, and
this week a federal appeals panel upheld that decision.

Monsanto, ruled the appeals court, does not need to legally
extend a guarantee that farmers accidently using trace amounts of
patented seeds won’t be sued because the company “has made
binding assurances that it will not 'take legal action against
growers whose crops might inadvertently contain traces of
Monsanto biotech genes (because, for example, some transgenic
seed or pollen blew onto the grower’s land).'"

"Monsanto's binding representations remove any risk of suit
against the appellants as users or sellers of trace amounts (less
than one percent) of modified seed,” the court ruled.

In the decision, the appeals panel sided with Monsanto while also
acknowledging that the company’s promise not to litigate in
situations where farmers exceed their one-percent threshold of
unauthorized use of patented products doesn’t provide solace to
concerned farmers. The company currently acknowledges on its
website that it will not litigate in instances where farmers are
found to have trace amounts of patented crops on their fields.

It “has never been nor will it be Monsanto policy to exercise
its patent rights where trace amounts of our patented seeds or
traits are present in farmer’s fields as a result of inadvertent
means,” the company writes on their website.

“One problem with Monsanto’s disclaimer,” the court ruled
this week, “is that it has limited scope: it applies only to
growers or sellers of ‘trace’ amounts of seed. At oral argument,
Monsanto resisted our efforts to clarify whether it would assert
its patents against a conventional grower who inadvertently uses
or sells greater than trace amounts of modified seed, but who,
for example, does not make use of the Roundup Ready trait by
spraying the plants with glyphosate. Thus, we cannot conclude
that Monsanto has disclaimed any intent to sue a conventional
grower who never buys modified seed, but accumulates greater than
trace amounts of modified seed by using or selling contaminated
seed from his fields.”

“The appellants have alleged no concrete plans or activities
to use or sell greater than trace amounts of modified seed, and
accordingly fail to show any risk of suit on that basis. The
appellants therefore lack an essential element of standing. The
district court correctly concluded that it lacks Declaratory
Judgment Act jurisdiction,” the court continued.

Andrew Kimbrell, a lawyer with the Center for Food Safety, told
Reuters he wasn’t happy with the court’s decision.

"It is a very bizarre ruling that relies on a paragraph on a
website," he said. "It is a very real threat to American
farmers. This is definitely appealable."

Dave Murphy, founder and executive director of Food Democracy
Now!, told Farm and Ranch Guide that “Today’s ruling may give
farmers a toehold in courts regarding the unwanted contamination
of their crops, but it does not protect our food supply from the
continued proliferation of Monsanto’s flawed technology.”

"The assertion that Monsanto would pursue patent infringement
against farmers that have no interest in using the company's
patented seed technology was hypothetical from the outset,"
Monsanto responded to the ruling in a statement issued Monday.

According to this week’s opinion, Monsanto filed 144 infringement
suits and settled about 700 other cases without litigation
between 1997 and 2010. Protests against the company were held
last month in dozens of countries around the globe.